removing the "mis" from information

Tuesday, May 15, 2007

thoughtomator is retiring

I am retiring from blogging and all internet commentary, and politics as a whole.

While I know many have appreciated my unique point of view over the many years that I have used this handle, I have finally had enough of politics. My naivete and innocence are now completely extinct - I know now for certain that there are so few who share my point of view at this point in time that there is no chance that I will see any of my hopes fulfilled.

The world is insane; and in the context of an insane world, it is I who appear crazy to many. I'm tired of fighting uphill all the time. I'm tired of having to explain the fundamentals of what America is in every conversation. I'm tired of all the deniers of Islamic ambition. I'm tired of having to argue with even Republicans that it is not just for the government to confiscate more of my income than was required of a medieval serf, who was considered in his time to be a slave.

Robert Heinlein predicted this state of affairs in Stranger in a Strange Land; this period of time was known as "The Crazy Years". (Read the book if you want to know what happens next.) The wisdom of Jubal Harshaw was never as clear to me as it is now.

It's time to look out for #1. It was a mistake to let my love of my country and my love of life itself to distract me from my personal concerns. Don't make the same mistake I have made all this time. Forget politics - an honest man will never have enough allies in positions of power to make a difference. It is enough to be willing to lay one's life down in defense of that which one loves. I owe the world no more than that.

When reason returns to the national debate, when I perceive that discussing issues with others is no longer a complete waste of my time, perhaps I shall ressurect thoughtomator. Until then, my participation in this conversation brings me only frustration and pain and anguish. I don't need it. Until then, I will cast my ballots unmarked to register my complete dissatisfaction with all politicians, all political parties, and all policies. All my internet links to news and politics sites are already deleted, and I pray I am wise enough to keep it that way.

May God bless America. We are going to need it.


Is no one serious about terrorism?

written in response to a comment on linked in the title of this post. I'm tired of people who support the administration telling me that not supporting "nation building" is tanamount to surrender to terrorists.

I understand that some people adhere to the party line no matter what. But I have no respect for it.

Ron Paul adheres to the Constitution. A real conservative, not a fake Bush globosocialist "compassionate conservative", understands that that is primary.

By the way, Bush's War on Terror is liberty-destroying BS and I'm glad to have someone like Ron Paul in office fighting for my freedom. Bush himself decried the very sort of "nation-building" that he is engaged in now, back when he was first asking for our votes.

So quit your "surrender" canard. I can tell you are at no real risk of personally suffering a terrorist attack from the lightweight arguments you offer; the worst risk you run by backing these wrongheaded policies is perhaps a minor economic loss. Since it's my neck that's actually on the line, not yours, I'd appreciate if you'd learn something about terrorism and Islam and the principles of life and liberty and the pursuit of happiness that make America what it is before you toss more of my hard-earned money into this futile effort while doing nothing that actually lessens my risk of terrorism.

You want to fight a war on terror? Here's how:

1) Call out Islam for the murderous religion of savage barbarians that it is;

2) Control the borders;

3) Engage in a crash program of establishing American independence from Arab oil; and

4) Attack our enemies with overwhelming force until they unconditionally surrender.

If you can't bring yourself to back this program then you should leave the discussion so that adults can deal with serious issues without your interference.

I'm disgusted by all the people who are so blinded by the party line that they can't see how totally ineffective at actually combatting terrorism the administration's policies are.

I vote that the consideration of anti-terrorist policies be restricted to those of us who have actually personally endured Islamic terrorism. The rest of you have no idea what you're talking about and haven't the incentive to take it any more seriously than just another political football. Pizza, anyone?

I survived the 1993 attack on the World Trade Center and also 9/11 by the grace of God. Nearly lost both my mother and sister in 9/11, as well, and got to smell the mixture of incinerated human flesh and aluminum for three weeks afterwards. I live just outside DC; my family is in NYC. I've had plenty of incentive to be thinking about this far far longer than you have. This administration is not doing anything that will substantially reduce my risk of suffering another terrorist attack.

Play your frivolous games with someone else's life, not mine.

Friday, May 11, 2007

Ophelia at the DNC

I found this to be highly amusing. DNC lawyers actually wrote a cease-and-desist letter to a (sort of) conservative political discussion forum with regards to repeating a story from the radio that claimed that Howard Dean advised Kansas Gov. Sebilius how to politicize the tornado damage and blame it on the President.

With all the accusations that fly around in political discussions on the Internet, why would this particular one gain the attention of the lawyers at the DNC?

Methinks they doth protest too much.

Labels: , ,

Tuesday, May 08, 2007

Brain teaser

If you find yourself wanting to tackle a difficult challenge, try to name one policy that is too left wing for the Democrat party to support.

Thursday, April 19, 2007

Cable Service Oddity

Dear Comcast,

It appears that the channel that should be showing NBC has in fact been playing episodes of the Twilight Zone all day. Can you please check the line at your earliest convenience?


Tuesday, April 17, 2007

Virginia Tech, Aliens, and Gun Control

The murders at Virginia Tech have, predictably, brought out the harpies of gun control with a vengeance.

Count on hearing nothing from them on the topic of VT declaring itself an unarmed victim zone, erm, I mean gun-free zone.

The VT campus was the ideal gun control environment; any student caught with a gun on campus would have been, by policy, expelled.

But zero tolerance for guns doesn't do a thing to prevent a criminal from obtaining one illegally, all it does is make sure that good and decent people do not have the tools to defend themselves and others, should something like this occur. One armed citizen could have stopped this in its tracks before it ever got started.

The perp has been identified; he is a foreign national permanent resident alien from South Korea. It must be asked: how did a foreign national in the United States get these guns? According to rumors flying around the 'net, someone claiming to have been the one to have sold the guns to the perp expressed relief that all the paperwork was perfectly in order (and thus, his own butt covered).

Something I do not know, and am very curious to find out, is if it is in fact legal for a foreign national to buy guns here.

On a personal note, I will soon officially be a Virginian. After I convert my driver's license and registration, and sign up to vote, my very next act will be to apply for a concealed carry permit. Then my next act following will be to finally, as a US citizen, for the first time in my life, be able to unashamedly assert my 2nd Amendment rights to self defense. If some foreign national goes on a shooting spree in my neighborhood, I will personally guarantee that he won't get to kill 30 people.

Saturday, April 14, 2007

Imus IV: The Corzine Effect

So, while racing his way at an illegal speed to another Imus-related panderfest, while wearing no seat belt - I am referring to the guy who instituted the practice of the "seat belt checkpoint" in New Jersey, of course - Corzine's (evil, global-warming-causing, baby-eating) SUV was allegedly forced of the road due to the actions of a red pickup driver.

Well, they found the driver of the pickup.

And he's been charged with...? Nothing. Why exactly did they track him down? What was he questioned for?

The driver is referred to as 20 years old, a worker at an Atlantic City casino, and a "special needs" driver. So I guess he wasn't a suitable scapegoat for the Governor's self-inflicted injuries.

This all has me wondering quite a bit, as to whether the "special needs" of the driver include legal permission to be in the United States in the first place. This story, when combined with the official version of events, simply doesn't add up.

The experienced media watcher at this point must consider the two major possibilities to be:

1) The driver is an illegal alien, and the governor being a coddler of illegal aliens will under no circumstances allow this fact to become public; or

2) The whole story about the red pickup was horse manure in the first place.

In either event, Corzine is looking a whole lot less deserving of sympathy than, say, the falsely-accused, media-lynched Duke lacrosse players.

Where's Nancy Grace now that we need someone to ask some hard questions and insist on answers with substance?

Update: It gets even better. Apparently Corzine's vehicle was flashing emergency lights as well. So that's three laws he was breaking, in addition to an additional abuse of power, using taxpayer resources to attend an event that had absolutely nothing to do with the responsibilities of his office.

No wonder they're trying to suppress information about this incident.

Friday, April 13, 2007

Imus III - Meet Terry Moran, ABC News House Racist

Just read it... it's worse on its own than anything I could add to it.

Will Terry Moran be the next to be Imused? He sure should be, if there's any consistency to the standard that the race hustlers of this country have imposed.

Update: Apparently someone at ABC news is deleting some of the more devastating comments being placed on the blog - things that referred to contacting advertisers and the like as well. Someone is feeling the heat already.

Imus II: The Law of Unintended Consequences

This Don Imus controversy is getting more and more enjoyable. Suddenly, Imus himself is no longer the sole focus; instead, the long, storied, and explicitly racist history of Sharpton and Jackson now get the stage, as well as the drenched-in-derogation rap industry. Bravo!

What's more, all the fakers in this story are poised to get their comeuppance:

- Media Matters, the self-appointed media censorship group, now is itself under scrutiny, as to the legitimacy of the purpose of their mission, the fact that the people propogating this story are openly paid agitators, and the complete lack of criticism from that group with regards to far worse perpetrators of media degradation, who just happen to be aligned with the politically correct sponsors of the group.

- Jon Corzine, who, while traveling to a forum to pimp these grievances, and in the process of breaking at least two of the laws he is charged with enforcing, encounters an act of God, divine justice, sending him to the hospital and effectively ending his governorship, if not his life. I for one don't believe the injuries are limited to what has been publicly admitted, and I say good - couldn't have happened to a nicer guy.

- Hillary Clinton, another individual who has not hesitated to wield the grievance stick, now has to explain why she accepted a fundraiser from a rap industry executive. One sterling example of this gentleman's work features 24 references to the word that white people aren't allowed to say - on one track alone. $800,000 flows to the Hillary campaign... will she weather the storm? Will her media allies bury it? Or will she lose even more ground in the fundraising race to the upstart Obama?

- Sharpton and Jessie J and Louis Farakkhan, whose grossly racist past is now coming back to haunt them. Sharpton in particular is getting it from two sides, now that the Duke lacrosse players have been cleared. Tawana Brawley, and all the racist statements that came from Sharpton as a result, make him look like the lying racist hypocrite he is when either topic is discussed. Hymietown Jackson himself has a lot of explainin' to do, for his extensive Jew-baiting past. Farakkhan - all you need to do is listen to any typical speech by him to realize that the primary bastion of frothing race-hate is the self-appointed black leadership. All three of them have careers that depend on the continuation of racial strife, and all three risk destruction.

Moreover, there are at least two major points that have yet to arise in the public debate, both of which could be potentially devastating to the Lefty culture that has poisoned our nation for so long.

- One of the Rutgers players, in a typical pre-programmed racial grievance statement, declared that this "scarred me for life". That's a little bit extreme, even for a lib to swallow; if something like this is a lifelong scar, you're waaaaaaay too hypersensitive, and perhaps just a bit mentally unstable. In terms of actual lifelong scars, it turns out that these lovely ladies have done quite a bit of self-inflicted wounds in the form of tattoos, which just so happen to be real lifelong scars. I would love to see this unfortunately popular phenomenon be publicly condemned as the self-degradation that it is. You want respect, honey? Then show us you respect yourself.

- It is starting to dawn on people that what Imus said is not at all an uncommon statement; that his chief crime is being a white person saying it. When the Cosbys of the world criticize the rappers for encouraging bad behavior, they get ostracized by the self-appointed leaders of the black community. Perhaps if he'd gotten the message, that it's perfectly OK to criticize those things if it is targeted exclusively at white people, he'd be a hero instead of an outcasQt.

As Drudge loves to say, "developing..."

Thursday, April 12, 2007

Don Imus and the End of Rap "Music"

Now it's official - the thought police have completely put Don Imus out of business, with his radio show gone as well as his TV show. The new sheriff is in town - and he doesn't take kindly to racially charged slurs, especially against black women.

Thank heavens for that!

I've been complaining about the degradation of music for a long time, and (c)rap "music" is at the top of my list of complaints. Since degrading black women is now cause to lose your job, it seems certain that this principle, equitably applied, will put 99% of rap manufacturers out of business. And it couldn't come soon enough for my tastes.

Thanks to Don Imus' inadvertent error, there is hope for the music industry once again.

We all know that the rule against ethnic slurs and degradation of black women will be equitably applied, now don't we? Buh-bye, Tupac wanna-bes, and good riddance.

Saturday, March 03, 2007

How to Respond to an Overt Homosexual

So there I was, chatting with this guy I knew - from his manner and mannerisms - was a homosexual, but since that wasn't the topic, I didn't broach it.

Of course, that doesn't stop them from shoving their perversions down our throats, does it? Of course not. So, during the course of our conversation, he comes out and says, casually yet sans appropriate context, "I'm gay."

Not the first time I encountered one of these deviants, but this time I was prepared. I extended my hand in a warm greeting, inviting him to shake it. He grasps my hand, thinking I'm affirming and approving of his, um... "lifestyle". I lock my hand onto his, and say, casually, with a warm, bright, smile...

"I pick my nose and eat it."

I highly recommend this technique for getting people to keep their disgusting personal habits to themselves.

Sunday, February 11, 2007


"Generalissimo Anna Nicole Smith is still dead"

There. It's been said. Can we move on now?

Friday, February 02, 2007

Giuliani, Democrat?

So it's been reported that Rudy Giuliani has not yet decided to run as a Republican. The glaring implication is that he may just decide to run as a Democrat. If I were Giuliani, that's just what I'd do.

In his quest to become and remain Mayor of New York City (perhaps the third most difficult executive political office in America, behind Governor of California and President of the United States) Giuliani had to take many positions that resemble the Democrat's rite of initiation: in particular, pro-abortion, anti-gun, and pro-homosexual positions, and in a manner that could not be repudiated, and had a public divorce with his 2nd wife in a particularly ugly fashion - her fault, but that's not going to help him much. In addition, with illegal immigration looking to be the monster issue in the next election, Giuliani does not match up well against most of the other Republican candidates on that issue.

What Giuliani does have going for him on the conservative side of the fence are things like law and order and anti-corruption credentials. As a former prosecutor instrumental to breaking the mob, and mayor instrumental in breaking the education syndicate, he is potentially very attractive to the vast majority of Americans who feel that the federal system is rotten to the core. As a compelling, if not eloquent, speaker, he has the Reaganic ability to supercede the media in delivering his message to the public at large. In terms of law and order, he was at first mocked ruthlessly for his "broken windows" philosophy; the end result was a historic success emulated by cities worldwide.

So the Giuliani situation is thus: to compete as a Republican, he needs to reverse, divert, or suppress strong opinion on four issues many voters - especially Republican voters - feel very strongly about, which are guns, gays, the right to life, and personal integrity, while engineering a transformation on immigration. But if he were to instead compete as a Democrat, he's already on the correct side of the first three,... and the fourth is not an issue for Democrats. As for the last, he'd again be correct for the Democrats rather than making a change of position that no one would believe, anyway. As an urban mayor, he is better positioned than any other candidate to speak to the needs of the large cities where Democrat votes are counted.

Surveying the field, the Republican candidates include two well-funded opponents (McCain and Romney) who are not well-distinguished from Giuliani; indeed, most conservatives view him and Romney as interchangable, though not quite as odious as McCain. So his niche is already occupied - the left-Republican, AKA "RINO" option is well-covered, and as a third candidate he merely splits that sector of the vote with his main rivals. On the right-Republican side are Ron Paul, Tom Tancredo, and Duncan Hunter; the last man standing among the three will claim the considerable GOP anti-illegal-immigration vote, and if not Hunter, the anti-corruption vote as well. As a result of all of this, Giuliani is uniquely poorly politically situated for a long term battle through the GOP primary - unlike any other GOP candidate he has competition on every issue that GOP voters care about.

On the Democrat side, however, there is a huge, gaping hole in the field for a conservative Democrat. Hillary claims this title but any inspection of her behavior reveals an orthodox Marxist - in an odd way, her claim is true, but what she is conservative about is Cold War Politboro politics. Obama is nothing more than fluff - watch his numbers drop like a rock, the first time he takes a strong stand on anything - and Edwards is decisively claiming the left of the left.

As a Democrat, Giuliani wouldn't have to answer for his positions on guns and gays; in fact, he'd earn extra credit for taking those stands while a Republican. On the other hand, the fact of the party switch to run would hurt him as a Johnny-come-lately - but this too would be mitigated by the common understanding that a Republican in New York City is a Democrat nationally. (And who would make such a charge, anyway? The political toddlers Obama and Breck Girl? Carpetbagger Hillary?) Such a run is even more inviting when you consider that none of the minor Democrats stand a prayer and all of them bleed votes from the left; Giuliani would give the Democrats a fully vetted, successful political executive, and "America's Mayor", as their candidate, and importantly, someone with an existing cross-party base of support. While nominees typically battle for independent voters, Giuliani could grab a chunk right out of his GOP opponent's base - assuring Democrats of certain victory.

The big objection is that he would have to fight Hillary for it. But he may just be better off in a multi-candidate race against her, than one-on-one in a general election. Moreover, his entry as a Democrat would squeeze Hillary out of her own political niche (the pretense of being a "sober Democrat"), and he just might despise her enough to do it.

Wednesday, January 24, 2007

Why Nancy Can't Not Blink

Tardive dyskinesia?

Anyone who saw the video of the State of the Union (SOTU) speech can't help but wonder: what the heck was Nancy Pelosi jacked up on? This woman was blinking so much, her eyelids threatened to fly right off the asphalt. Some are calling it at 80 blinks a minute; I think that's maybe a bit high, but I'm fairly certain it was at least 55-60 in parts. The frame's inclusion of the slow-blinking, Mona Lisa-faced Cheney made Nancy's rapid flutterings even more dramatic.

Now I confess, my first reaction was to think that she was communicating with her Chinese masters in code, with the teething motions for punctuation. But once I realized that I couldn't prove it if it were, I settled in for something a little more reliable: this woman was "high as fuck", to use a random descriptor of a not unfamiliar condition.

Some have posited that her rapid blinking was a sign of deception; and indeed it often is. But if that were a significant factor here, then how is it that she was the only one afflicted in a room full of politicians? It wasn't even her turn to lie, and she couldn't have outdone the President that night if it were.

So I googled a bit for some answers. "drug rapid blink" was my search, and it turned up some very interesting things, including this article on seizures. It also taught me a new word: blepharospasm. (Say that five times fast. Now you've got it too.) It might be Meige's Syndrome - the mouth movements do lend themselves to that explanation - but that condition is exceedingly rare, and she would already have attempted to capitalize on it politically if it were, champion of the helpless and all that, when I ran across this:

In such cases, spasms of the eyelids are accompanied by jaw clenching or mouth opening, grimacing, and tongue protrusion. Blepharospasm can be induced by drugs, such as those used to treat Parkinson's disease. When it is due to antiparkinsonian drugs, reducing the dose alleviates the problem.

So Nancy may have Parkinson's, which is not beyond being a credible explanation. But there is yet another possible explanation: Tardive dyskinesia:

+ TD is a manifestation of chronic neuroleptic toxicity that is often permanent. It is characterized by involuntary repetitive movement of the lips and tongue (buccolingual dysplasia), limbs (choreoathetosis), and eyes (rapid blinking movements).

+ Older women are most susceptible to TD; however, it may occur at any age after 24 months of therapy.

But even better, from NIH:

Tardive dyskinesia is a neurological syndrome caused by the long-term use of neuroleptic drugs. Neuroleptic drugs are generally prescribed for psychiatric disorders, as well as for some gastrointestinal and neurological disorders. Tardive dyskinesia is characterized by repetitive, involuntary, purposeless movements. Features of the disorder may include grimacing, tongue protrusion, lip smacking, puckering and pursing, and rapid eye blinking.

Let's not forget Nancy is from San Francisco. Does Pelosi - our third in line of succession, after a President and Vice President that the Left has been chomping at the bit to see assassinated for years, have a condition that derives from long term use of drugs, to treat an underlying psychiatric condition too severe to reduce the dose? Or is it perhaps just a long term effect of heavy drug abuse? What are the implications of this for the condition of the rest of her brain?

Friday, January 19, 2007

Hello Script Kiddies

I can't be the only one sick of this stuff:

01/19/2007 08:53:30 AM",-,,"GET /a1b2c3d4e5f6g7h8i9/nonexistentfile.php HTTP/1.0"
"01/19/2007 08:53:30 AM",-,,"GET /adxmlrpc.php HTTP/1.0"
"01/19/2007 08:53:30 AM",-,,"GET /adserver/adxmlrpc.php HTTP/1.0"
"01/19/2007 08:53:31 AM",-,,"GET /phpAdsNew/adxmlrpc.php HTTP/1.0"
"01/19/2007 08:53:31 AM",-,,"GET /phpadsnew/adxmlrpc.php HTTP/1.0"
"01/19/2007 08:53:31 AM",-,,"GET /phpads/adxmlrpc.php HTTP/1.0"
"01/19/2007 08:53:31 AM",-,,"GET /Ads/adxmlrpc.php HTTP/1.0"
"01/19/2007 08:53:34 AM",-,,"GET /ads/adxmlrpc.php HTTP/1.0"
"01/19/2007 08:53:34 AM",-,,"GET /xmlrpc.php HTTP/1.0"
"01/19/2007 08:53:34 AM",-,,"GET /xmlrpc/xmlrpc.php HTTP/1.0"
"01/19/2007 08:53:34 AM",-,,"GET /xmlsrv/xmlrpc.php HTTP/1.0"
"01/19/2007 08:53:34 AM",-,,"GET /blog/xmlrpc.php HTTP/1.0"
"01/19/2007 08:53:35 AM",-,,"GET /drupal/xmlrpc.php HTTP/1.0"
"01/19/2007 08:53:35 AM",-,,"GET /community/xmlrpc.php HTTP/1.0" seems to be a hive of script kiddies.

Saturday, January 13, 2007

Yahoo Breakdown?

Something very serious is going on, on the Yahoo! network. Suddenly perfectly normal email - even mail sent from other Yahoo accounts - is getting categorized as bulk, or sometimes not even delivered at all. Outside services are also having trouble sending mail to valid accounts there.

The oddest part is the inconsistency of it. In a yahoo-account-to-yahoo-account exchange of emails, every other email from the other person went into my Bulk folder. From another Yahoo! user, I was receiving normally, and for no reason the latest mail I received from this person went into Bulk as well.

I wonder if this has anything to do with the router breakdown in Vienna, VA yesterday?

As they say on Drudge, "developing..."

Thursday, January 11, 2007

Sean Hannity, You Blithering Shill, or How and Where Iraq Was Lost

Coming back from work today, I was pissed off for other reasons, when I turned on the radio. Normally in the rare instances I do listen to the radio (in my car when I've forgotten the MP3 player or just don't have a mood for music) I listen to conservative talk radio.

So I turn on WMAL and get to listen to Hannity blathering on about how the war in Iraq is vital and how the Democrats are hypocrites and are saying all sorts of terrible things, with the subtext that the Democrats are the ones responsible for the debacle in Iraq.

The Democrats ARE hypocrites and do say all sorts of terrible (and insincere) things, because they are willing to say anything that will get them power. But they cannot be blamed as primarily responsible for our problems in Iraq. They were unhelpful, except to the enemy, but until a few months ago they had control over exactly zero branches of government. The state of Iraq is wholly the responsibility of Republicans, and the failure to acknowledge this (and responsibility for a whole host of other negative things) is the chief reason why they are now a minority in Congress. The GOP had full control over the government for over three years of our involvement in Iraq, and like it or not, they own this puppy.

We lost Iraq directly due to the actions of the Republican government, period. It was lost when instead of acknowledging Islam to be the enemy, which it is, we were told by the President and Commander-in-Chief that Islam is "a religion of peace". No it's not, scumbag, it's a religion of chopping people into little bits, and anyone who studies a lick of history can figure this out.

The war was lost when it was decided that instead of giving close and exclusive inspection to Muslims, who earned such scrutiny with their own words and actions, it was decided that normal Americans would have to endure harassment and violation by security personnel in airports instead.

The war was lost when people started realizing that the President's interest in security is a farce, as he not only allows but encourages millions of Mexicans to invade our nation in direct contravention of his sworn duty. If we won't defend our own borders, what business do we have defending Iraq's?

The war was lost when the standing order was given for National Guardsmen on our border to retreat in the face of an armed force crossing the border. It was lost when people started asking why Americans had to give up liberties for homeland security when the worst violation of homeland security was going on with the approval and encouragement of the President and many in Congress.

The war was lost when it was decided that our soldiers should be something other than the world's best butt-kickers. It was lost when it was decided not to take out the sources of enemy funding and personnel in Iran and Syria. It was lost when our soldiers found that every person shooting at them would get a lawyer and a trial before our guys got to shoot back.

The war was lost when enemy combatants got to prance about for the cameras in Guantanamo rather than being terminated on the battlefield with the extreme prejudice they had earned. It was lost when the same happened to Saddam.

The war was lost when Al-Sadr demonstrated open defiance of the United States and paid no significant price for his actions. It continues to be lost with every breath that odious pig takes.

The war was lost when a Republican President decided his top domestic priority was the enactment of big-government programs and other policies previously found only on the Left. It was lost when a Republican Congress became the most profligate in memory if not in history. It was lost when due to these actions, the coalition that had elected George Bush twice in the face of the most rabid Democrat opposition was shattered by the very officeholders who betrayed promise after promise.

The war was lost because of all these things, and every last one of these decisions was made by a Republican President, a Republican Congress, or both.

So it really doesn't matter, ultimately, what the Democrats did or did not do, because they weren't running the show.

So screw you, Sean Hannity. Some of us actually do care about the defense and future of this nation, and it's because of shills like you who adhere to party line with no critical eye or skepticism whatsoever helped to usher it along. You're just another politically elite a-hole making yourself rich by acting against the clear interest of Americans as citizens and America as a nation.

Saturday, January 06, 2007

Nice little XSS worm

Check out this very interesting set of HTTP requests:

Date Request
1/6/2007 12:48 GET //README HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:48 GET /horde//README HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:48 GET /horde2//README HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:48 GET /horde3//README HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:48 GET /horde-3.0.5//README HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:48 GET /horde-3.0.6//README HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:48 GET /horde-3.0.7//README HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:48 GET /horde-3.0.8//README HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:48 GET /horde-3.0.9//README HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:48 GET /mail//README HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:48 GET /email//README HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:48 GET /webmail//README HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:48 GET /newmail//README HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:48 GET /mails//README HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:48 GET /mailz//README HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:50 GET //chat/messagesL.php3 HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:50 GET /chat//chat/messagesL.php3 HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:50 GET /phpchat//chat/messagesL.php3 HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:50 GET /PhpMyChat//chat/messagesL.php3 HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:50 GET /chatroom//chat/messagesL.php3 HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:50 GET /chats//chat/messagesL.php3 HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:50 GET /forum//chat/messagesL.php3 HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:50 GET /php/phpmychat//chat/messagesL.php3 HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:50 GET /phpMyChat-0.14.2//chat/messagesL.php3 HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:50 GET /phpMyChat-0.14.5//chat/messagesL.php3 HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:50 GET /phpMyChat//chat/messagesL.php3 HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:50 GET /phpMyChat-0.14.3//chat/messagesL.php3 HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:50 GET /phpMyChat-0.14.4//chat/messagesL.php3 HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:50 GET /chat1//chat/messagesL.php3 HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:50 GET /forums//chat/messagesL.php3 HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:50 GET /chat2//chat/messagesL.php3 HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:50 GET /chat3//chat/messagesL.php3 HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:50 GET /community//chat/messagesL.php3 HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:51 GET /cacti//graph_image.php HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:51 GET /stats//graph_image.php HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:51 GET //graph_image.php HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:52 GET //xmlrpc.php HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:52 GET //xmlrpc/xmlrpc.php HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:52 GET //xmlsrv/xmlrpc.php HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:52 GET //blog/xmlrpc.php HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:52 GET //drupal/xmlrpc.php HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:52 GET //community/xmlrpc.php HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:52 GET //blogs/xmlrpc.php HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:52 GET //blogs/xmlsrv/xmlrpc.php HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:52 GET //blog/xmlsrv/xmlrpc.php HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:52 GET //blogtest/xmlsrv/xmlrpc.php HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:52 GET //b2/xmlsrv/xmlrpc.php HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:52 GET //b2evo/xmlsrv/xmlrpc.php HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:52 GET //wordpress/xmlrpc.php HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:52 GET //phpgroupware/xmlrpc.php HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:54 GET // HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:54 GET //cgi-bin/ HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:54 GET //scgi-bin/ HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:54 GET //awstats/ HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:54 GET //cgi-bin/awstats/ HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:54 GET //scgi-bin/awstats/ HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:54 GET //cgi/awstats/ HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:54 GET //scgi/awstats/ HTTP/1.1
1/6/2007 12:54 GET //scripts/ HTTP/1.1

Methinks all these enthusiasts for "Web 2.0" technologies have no idea what they are getting into.

If anyone wants an database-drive webserver built on a more conservative philosophy that's not vulnerable to this BS, drop me a line.

Tuesday, January 02, 2007

Let me be the first to say it

I think we've just identified the perfect coach for the New York Giants next year - Chris Peterson, head coach of Boise State. Guy prepares his team, has imagination and guts.

So since someone is going to end up suggesting this one, I'm going to claim credit for thinking of it first!

Tuesday, December 26, 2006

Radical ideas for the New York Giants

The New York Giants are a sorry lot these days, at 7-8 once again officially a losing team. Amazingly, they may make the playoffs, but I'm sure even the team itself knows that's a one-game event for them this year.

The problems on the field are many: injuries and a sorry lack of execution at nearly all positions. The problems off the field are even greater - communication within the organization is apparently done, these days, through the New York Post.

Since it's now a public issue, let me offer some radical solutions to the Giants' problems.

First, make a plan. I'd say an achievable plan is "to dominate the NFL during the decade starting 2010". Why bring home just one championship? Let's make this worthwhile and bring home a few.

Second, learn it and love it: "rebuilding". This team has a LOT of that to do and should take decisive action with this as the goal. New York wants a team that can win championships and this Giants team is not it.

Third, flush all sources of negativity. This translates into a) firing Coughlin, who likes to say one thing and do another; and b) dealing pretty much every big name on the team for draft picks and prospects.

This brings us to the fourth item, depth. The injuries suffered by the Giants this year exposed that the second string is not able to capably support the first. Moreover, that makes the existing first-stringers' (and the coaches') jobs harder, they spend less time rotated out and resting and have more pressure on each to personally execute. Trading away Eli Manning, Jeremy Shockey, Michael Strahan, and Plaxico Buress should provide a wealth of talent across the board in return.

Fifth, establish an identity. If the New York Giants are going to be the champion team they should be, they will be a running team, not just say they are a running team. If you pass in every important situation and pass often on first and second down, you are not a running team, sorry. If you rush for half a quarter and abandon it after minimal success, you are not a running team. The goal of a running team should be to average 5 yards or better per rush, so that they can reliably make first downs with the rush by the 3rd. The advantage that is gained from being able to do this is enormous - the clock moves, bringing the win closer; the defense rests and refreshes its strength; and turnovers are minimized. To complement such an offense, a strong defensive line and reasonably competent secondary is necessary to prevent an opponent from doing the same.

Let's take a look at some recruiting goals specifically:

a) At QB: If you have only one QB option in this league, you're screwed. The success of backup and rookie QBs around the league this year (Romo, Young, Rivers, Garcia, and on and on down the list) is because the existing starters couldn't perform at a winning level. This year, Eli Manning couldn't perform at a winning level - he should have been pulled in the middle of the Bears game when the season was still salvageable. (To illustrate the depth of the problem, Eli has a good chance to break 20 INTs this year, with 18 so far and a game to go.) But since the Giants have had no other QB to try (apparently Lorenzen and Hasselbeck are listed on the depth chart as a formality alone), what should have been a strong team, even a championship contender, was largely sunk by the personal slump of Eli Manning. Manning or not, Eli is not what he was thought to be when grand concessions were made to draft him, and it's time to prepare to cut losses if necessary.

b) On the lines: Success at the line whether on offense or defense is the heart of football. When it comes December and January and the wind is blowing and there's snow on the field, the teams that win (playoff games and championships) do it through controlling the line of scrimmage. Therefore having strong, reliable, and deep offensive and defensive lines should be the #1 priority in recruiting. The OL has played decently this season, but they've been around a while and some fresh blood - at least 3 new talented young players to serve as backups/rotation players/learners from the veterans are needed. I would look forward to having a completely new offensive line within 4 years, young guys who could have a decade of playing football together to look forward to - imagine how fearsome the teams behind such a line would be! This is a key, key, goal, more important than who is the QB, as behind such a line most any QB could competently get the job done.

The DL got rocked by injuries - it's just bad luck that two Pro Bowl DEs were taken out for much of the season. For the future, getting rid of Strahan while he's still worth something on the market is the best thing to do, given that Kiwanuka played well in his trial under fire. The tackles could be playing better, throwing those positions open to competition and rotation would be helpful both as player incentive and for team stamina during games. A tired defensive line late in a game is a bad bad thing. Start with Umeniyora, Kiwanuka, and Cofield and bring in at least 5 solid guys to back them up. Kiwanuka will have to grow up fast, but I believe he can be depended on to do it, based on the way he has stepped up this season.

c) Offense - other backs - Brandon Jacobs is simply amazing, and what's better, he's young too. This is the guy who will be doing most of the running behind the offensive line we're going to build. Put him through the same regimen that taught Tiki Barber not to cough of the ball - Jacobs is pretty good about that already, but it never hurts to be sure. Jim Finn at FB is one of the few veterans worth keeping, and I would consider cross training him as a tight end, to be 3rd TE on 3 TE sets (an option Giants do not currently possess). It would also be worthwhile to seek a Reggie-Bush style tailback, to give the offense another way to confuse and disrupt an opposing defense.

d) Offense - wide receivers - Amani Toomer was never supposed to be a #1 receiver. He's a solid #2 receiver that was always good enough. Depending on him to be the #1 opened up the opportunity for what should have been a minimally damaging injury to become a critical fault. Trade Plaxico Burress to a team that doesn't mind if he doesn't care. Draft a receiver if any spots are open after linemen are taken care of (which they should be, considering all the draft picks we're getting for the "stars".) None of the other wide receivers are good enough to make the grade, trade them too for draft picks and start anew. Toomer should be used as #2 receiver and veteran teacher for the next few years, and if he develops coaching ability, to receivers coach.

e) Offense - tight ends - Trade Shockey. He ought to be worth a bundle on the market. Draft a good blocker and catcher. Shancoe could be worth keeping around.

f) Defense - linebackers - The Giants are actually doing pretty well at LB; Pierce is fierce and there's up and coming talent. Trade Emmons and bring in a couple of new young guys to refresh competition. Make LBs learn to punt and kick - if any of them end up having any talent at it, it would be like having an extra man on special-teams coverage if you can pull it off. One of them has to have a good leg for kickoffs at the very least.

g) Defense - secondary - Depth at safety is a real problem and should be addressed with draft picks. Backup corners are young and will probably look a lot better given experience, a real running game to give them rest, and a better pass rush. Sam Madison one of the few vets worth keeping.

h) (Offense) Kicking game - Kicker and punter are getting old, it might be a good idea to start the search for a new one for the next decade. Give all players on the team a shot at it and see if any have talent; there are only so many slots on the roster and being able to make the best use of every one is an advantage fitting of a championship team.

Speaking about coaching... Coughlin has to go, a blown opportunity of this magnitude demands accountability at his level. He should resign rather than be subjected to the humililation of being fired. Bring in a low-profile, soft-spoken coach with a demonstrated record of successfully running the ball and being creative in play-calling. After Coughlin, I'd say the rest of the coaches should go too as part of flushing negativity. (If there is a particular one or two that deserve to be held on then of course they should remain.)

So there you go, a plan for making the Giants a championship team.

Well, yes, I may be nobody, but at least I have a plan for it.

Do the Giants?

Monday, November 13, 2006

Bears at Giants 11/12/2006

This was in my pre-game opinion, the game of the season, a titanic struggle for home-field advantage in the NFC. So I bought a couple of tickets and got seats in the first tier - a great view. Unfortunately, the Giants stopped playing in the second half. I guess it really does matter when two Pro Bowl DEs, a Pro Bowl safety, your leading receiver, and a starting linebacker are all out, especially when your second receiver and a starting cornerback are also hobbling back from injuries. It didn't help having a key lineman breaking a leg in the first quarter, either. Eli Manning played what must have been the worst game of his professional career - the stats say he completed 14 passes. I must have missed the first eight because after the time I got to my seat, midway through the first quarter, he could have completed no more than 6 for the rest of the game.

This was a big-time blown opportunity for the Giants; however, this is tempered by the fact that they simply didn't have their "A" team on the field (due to aforementioned injuries). When you have to start a tackle at DE, you are in desperate straits!

The game was a lot closer than the 38-20 final score indicates; the Giants were leading for the entire first half and part of the second. The Giants' "D" deserves major kudos for an excellent performance, especially under those conditions.

We'll see you in Chicago over the winter, Bears fans. Just remember that next time we'll have the whole team there to play. Turnoversaurus Rex, keep on fumbling!

I had actually driven up from VA to NYC just for this game; it was a horrible drive, with rain the entire way and terrible traffic. What is normally a 3.5-4 hour drive became seven plus (thus I missed part of the first quarter). Afterwards I drove my friend back to the city and then drove all the way back down to VA, for a grand total of 12 hours of driving in one day.

I'm exhausted but it was nice to see my first football game in person.

Wednesday, November 08, 2006

GOP Loses - Should Conservatives Celebrate?

I think our chances improved overnight. Even with "our" party controlling all three branches of government, our agenda never made it to the table, except as the subject of an occasional and reluctant symbolic (never substantial) tip of the hat. We got two SCOTUS judges out of the entire six years; while I'm thankful for those two, that they are the entire accomplishment of this government in all that time is incredibly shameful.

In the post-WW2 era, there have been three core reasons to vote GOP:

1) Smaller government/lower taxes
2) Protection of liberty and repeal of restrictions/regulations on it
3) Strong national defense

The outgoing GOP government made a travesty of the first, a mockery of the second, and a farce of the third:

- Spending through the roof. No secret. First act: $1.2 trillion dollar prescription drug program the excesses of which would make LBJ blush.
- One small tax cut five years ago with an expiration date attached is not much of a claim to tax-cutting, not when more and more people are affected by the AMT, something that got no attention under 6 years of GOP governance.
- Demands for sacrifice of personal liberty from citizens, but illegal aliens subject to fewer and fewer restrictions. Did they think people didn't notice?
- Controlling the borders and the passage of human beings across them should have become an immediate national priority before noon on 9/11. This is common sense. Five years later we have a proposal for a fence that may not be a real fence and only covers a third of one of two very long borders anyway... and whether it is funded or not, and whether the funds will be spent on actually building it, those questions are still awaiting answers.
- Iraq. There are a lot of people who completely agree that Saddam needed to be taken out but were never convinced that "nation-building" was a necessary or proper step... and even among those who wanted some measure of nation-building, how many envisioned this?
- Strategically, the best reason to go into Iraq was to use it as a base from which to deal with Syria and Iran; indeed, this was a clinching argument in placing Iraq into the overall framework of the War on Terror. But instead of pressuring those nations, we allow them to pressure us instead, without consequence. We are no longer setting the terms of the conflict according to our needs.
- Who supports the soldier? Is it the one who uses him for political ends, allowing jihadis to take potshots at him from safe havens in Syria, in Iran, and in Iraq itself? Or the one that wants to empower him to get the job done and come home to his family?

Of course the Democrats are evil. They are not ashamed at all and will pretty much tell you so. But this is not an argument to support a GOP that is morphing into a second Democrat party - rather it is an argument to clean house, because we can only get our agenda on the table if we control the GOP. If we support a GOP we don't control, we are simply pushing further into the future the day when we have a representative of and advocate for our views at the national table. First, the GOP must be what we want it to be; only then can it be used as a tool to defeat the Democrats. Without first controlling the GOP there is no gain from defeating the Democrats; a lefty-controlled GOP is just as bad as lefty-controlled Dems (a redundant phrase), and worse in some cases. It is because the Democrats are beyond hope that we cannot allow the GOP to be the same.

So yeah, we got two good SCOTUS judges. But I'll tell you something, and that is that the simple willingness of the legislature to assert its Constitutional prerogative on oversight of the judiciary and the Presidency would have been a hundred times as powerful. The lack of will to do that or to otherwise put themselves out for the people who put them into office translated directly into a lack of will of the people to keep them in office.

Saturday, November 04, 2006

NFL Week 9 picks

This week has some interesting lines. I'll pick:
- Giants (-13) over Houston. Thirteen points is a lot. But Giants are looking like Super Bowl contenders and Houston is losing to Tennessee. Giants play this one at home, the only danger is overconfidence. Against a weak defense like Houston's, Eli & Co. can really rack up the points. While Houston has a pretty good offense, their offensive line isn't up to the task of standing up to this Giants defense, battered as it may be.

Giants have good players even in 3rd and 4th positions all the way down the depth chart. If you think the Giants are good this year, just wait - they are full of talented young players who will only get better over time. Jacobs will pick right up where Tiki left off, and don't be surprised if the Giants pick a good pass-catching RB in the next draft.

- Kansas City (+2) over St. Louis. I wouldn't be surprised if half the fans at this game are from KC; the two cities are not far apart. This will help to moderate the Rams' home field advantage. But mostly I pick the Chiefs because I got burned picking against them two weeks in a row.

- Baltimore (-3) over Cincinnati. Ravens are putting together a complete package; Cincy has issues to sort out.

- Tennessee (+9.5) over Jacksonville. Jax will probably win the game, but Tennessee will keep it close.

- Dallas (-3) over Washington. Tony Romo looks like the real deal. Will he be consistent enough to save their playoff hopes? We'll see. Washington has nothing on them, it is still waiting for its own Tony Romo; while Brunell is not the worst QB in the league, DC can do better.

- Green Bay (+3) over Buffalo. The Pack is on a roll, Buffalo has a QB whose name might as well be Lose-man. These Packers are not a good team, but they don't suck quite as bad as some of the stinkers in the league... stinkers like Buffalo.

- Tampa Bay (+1) over New Orleans. Tampa Bay played the Giants a lot closer than the score indicated; they were two dropped passes (sure scores that should have been caught) away from a tie game. Gruden is smart enough to run extra catching drills. New Orleans' luster is coming off and they have not been playing well recently.

- Atlanta (-5.5) over Detroit. This is more likely to be a blowout than close. Cold weather or not, Atlanta is clicking in the post-Giants aftermath, and they will not play a close game with a bad team.

- Chicago (-13.5) over Miami. Ouch! Could there be a bigger mismatch? Miami won't even get close to matching Arizona's feat of almost beating Chicago.

- Minnesota (-5) over San Francisco. Vikings will be eager to redeem themselves; San Francisco continues to play below professional level football.

- Cleveland (+12.5) over San Diego. The Browns aren't as terrible as their record might indicate. San Diego isn't as good as the hype, in my estimation. Consider this my anti-hype vote of the week.

- Denver (-3!) over Pittsburgh. Super Bowl champs or no, Pittsburgh has simply been playing bad football and has made many mistakes. Denver showed what it was capable of against Indy (which is that given home field advantage, they are almost as formidable a team as the Colts). This is my slam dunk pick for the week. I should put money on it. Steelers won't make the playoffs this year.

- New England (-3) over Indiannapolis. The hardest pick of the week, I really wanted to pick Indy, especially given the points. But I got burned picking against the Pats two weeks in a row, and I can't help but think that Belichik is fully capable of exploiting the Colts' run defense in a way that the Colts can find no answer within 60 minutes. Pats also have a knack for intercepting Manning so I think this week very well will be the end of the Colts unbeaten record for the season.

- Seattle (-7) over Oakland. Oakland gives no compelling reason to believe that they can do well on the road against a decent team. On the other hand, strange things do happen on Monday Night.

Tuesday, October 31, 2006

NFL Weekend wrapup

Looks like I got creamed in the afternoon/evening/Monday games, going 1-4, and that only because of a heroic effort by Peyton Manning. Looks like I have to reconsider a few teams - the Patriots, first and foremost, are looking stronger and stronger as the season goes on, and that's largely because of Belichick. Few opposing coaches are good enough to cope with his game plans. Come out with an all-pass offense in an NFL dominated by the running game? That's balls! I've been consistently underestimating KC as well, perhaps they don't suck this year. On the other side of things, I've been overestimating the improvements in Houston and San Francisco, as well as the strength of the Rams. So this week I'm afraid I log a losing record (barely) at 6-7 overall.

There's always next week!

Sunday, October 29, 2006

Vonage: Worst Ad Campaign Ever?

If you haven't seen it yet, just watch an NFL game. "Vonage: One Smart Decision Among Many, Many Stupid Ones." Both the slogan and the commercial carry the same message: "Vonage is for stupid people". Like the Einstein that created that ad campaign, and all the sub-literate morons who approved it and paid to run it.

NFL Sunday Update

For the early games:

Wins against spread

Losses against spread

Once again, 5-3 against the spread going into the afternoon.

NFL Sunday Week 8

It's a little late to be putting up picks, but since the games haven't yet started, it's all good. Here's my picks against the spread this week:

Giants +9 vs Bucs: Giants
Browns +2 vs Jets: Jets
Titans +3 vs Texans: Texans
Eagles +7 vs Jaguars: Jaguars
Bengals +3.5 vs Falcons: Falcons
Bears +16 vs 49ers: 49ers
Packers +4 vs Cardinals: Packers
Chiefs +6 vs Seahawks: Seahawks
Saints +2 vs Ravens: Ravens
Chargers +10 vs Rams: Rams
Steelers +9 vs Raiders: Steelers
Broncos +3 vs Colts: Colts
Panthers +5.5 vs Cowboys: Panthers
Patriots +2 vs Vikings: Vikings

A few game notes:
Look for Giants to meet up in blowout city today. How can you favor the Browns over any winning team? Texans building a future, Titans building a grave. Always root against the Eagles as a general rule. Falcons learned how to play from the Giants - and they're quick learners. Bears +16 vs. Oakland I still wouldn't take 'em; One freak 45-point game does not an offense make. Hate taking Packers over anyone, but then there's the Cards, who have proven they can lose anywhere, anytime, regardless of the circumstances. Saints are good but not as good as they're made out to be. Rams playing well, Chargers not, 10 points way too much to give there. I would have taken Colts at -3, but if they're giving me +3 then all the better. Cowboys will fall apart completely - morale is totally shot. Vikings show that this isn't the SB year Patriots.

Thursday, October 26, 2006

Muslim and Anger II

Here's a daily sample of my "muslim and anger" Google Alert:

Father and teenage daughter arrested for beating her boyfriend to ...
This is London - London,England,UK
... made several calls to the police - telling 999 staff of their anger that Mr ... The Muslim family, who are originally from Bangladesh, called police about their ...

Our State of Desperation in Iraq (6 Letters)
New York Times - United States
... It can be solved only by Muslim leaders, and right now, that does not seem to be ... We need to admit defeat and the horrible mistake our anger about 9/11 led us ...

Indonesia: The roots of Muslim Christian conflict
Spero News - USA
... Some analysts said the government did not want to invoke public anger in the predominantly Muslim nation by executing the Christians before the 3 Islamist ...

Anger, alienation persist one year after French riots
Lexington Herald Leader - Lexington,KY,USA
... are home mainly to immigrants and French citizens of immigrant origin, many of them Muslim. ... led to it have not changed and any spark could fuel anger at police ...

Readers' Comments Sheik's rape comments anger
Melbourne Herald Sun - Australia
AUSTRALIA'S top Muslim cleric Sheik Taj Aldin Alhilali should be sacked and deported for comments which essentially excused young Muslim men who committed rape ...
See all stories on this topic

Anger at Al Hilaly's 'uncovered meat' remarks
ABC Science Online - Australia
A senior Muslim cleric has drawn criticism for reportedly preaching that some women are attracting sexual assault by the way they dress and their actions. ...

Benedict Will Face Touchy Issues During Turkey Visit
National Catholic Register - North Haven,CT,USA
... to reach out to Muslims during the trip by conveying the true message of his Regensburg speech, which sparked intense anger in Turkey and other Muslim countries ...

IMRANA: Ant’s eye view
CNN-IBN - New Delhi,India
... hot in this blog and vent out my anger but then I was advised by a friend to see it from a logical perspective. He said, 'Do you think, the Muslim Personal Law ...

Voice of sanity in political chatter
Daily Telegraph - Sydney,New South Wales,Australia
... The world is a hotbed of violence and fear because extremists got their anger up and either ... to call it for what it is because it might cost them the Muslim vote ...

This is pretty much the kind of stuff I get every day.

According to supply and demand, the market value of "Muslim anger" is zero - infinite supply, negligible demand outside of the Western press.

Tuesday, October 24, 2006

Muslim and Anger

So I thought I'd try a little experiment. I went to Google and signed up for a news alert keyed to the words "Muslim" and "anger". This is a daily digest that contains only news stories that contain those two words.

I've been running it for a few months already. Every day I get a brand new list of stories.

All I've got to say is that if they're going to be that angry anyway, might as well give them a good reason to be angry. Nuke Mecca.

NFL Weekend wrapup

In the four afternoon games and the Monday Night Football game, I scored 4-1 against the spread, missing only the Oakland win. I should have known better on that one. This brings my record for the week to 9-4, not bad for a first time!

Some notes on the games...

MNF: Giants at Dallas - As I figured ("Giants can and will play into the teeth of the Cowboys' strength and win."), the Giants are playing top-notch pro football right now. They're making a few mistakes, but they aren't letting their opponents take advantage of it. All cylinders are clicking for them; the offense is well-balanced with effectiveness in both the pass and the rush, so an opponent can't shut down one without giving up too much to the other - a lesson that a lot of poor rushing teams around the league ought to be considering. So much for the vaunted "#1 rush defense" of the Cowboys, the Giants rushing game still moved well against the best the league had to offer, two weeks running. At this point I would favor the Giants against Chicago IN Chicago, they are playing that well. The Bears are not the team to beat in the NFC anymore. One thing about the Giants' wins over the past two weeks is that their opponents can't point to any one thing they could have done to turn the game around - both Atlanta and Dallas were reeling not just from getting beat, but from getting beat at their own game at home and coming out of it having no idea what they could have done better. That's the sign of a Super Bowl team, and as long as the Giants play this way they are my favorites to win the championship this year.

Arizona at Oakland - Bad against bad. How do you call a game like that? After the week before, Arizona had shown signs it was ready to be competitive. It just took three steps back. The basic requirement of any team that wants to be competitive in the NFL is that you have to beat bad teams.

Vikings at Seahawks - The Seahawks are a shadow of last year's team, and not only because of the injuries to Alexander and now Hasselbeck. The loss of Hutchinson to the Vikings made all the difference. Lesson here is that the running back is the least important part of a rushing offense; it's all the guys in front of him making the blocks and creating the lanes that are really earning the yards. Moreover, a team that has an effective passing game is even more effective at the run because it has another good option. This game helped to confirm my opinion that Edgerrin James is and always has been a mediocre running back, at best. Anyone can put up good rushing numbers when opponents are mostly playing pass defense.

Sunday, October 22, 2006

NFL Sunday update 1

So far I'm doing all right against the spread. I picked Jets, "Titans" (meant Texans, Titans are Tennessee and don't play today), Pats, Falcons, Bucs correctly, and was wrong on KC, Green Bay, and Cincinnati. 5-3 going into the afternoon games.

NFL Weekend Picks

Here's my picks against the line:

I'll start with the Jets, giving 3.5 points to the Lions. Home game for the Jets, Lions are awful, Jets are not quite.

Next I'll take the Chargers, giving 5 to the Chiefs. The Chargers have the complete package, Chiefs are not competitive and won't even make it a close game. They'll be lucky not to get blown out yet again.

The Titans will do better than the 9.5 spread against the Jaguars. While their defense is crap, the Titans do have a pretty decent offense. Jacksonville has a solid defense but its offense is mediocre, so I just don't see them running up the score that much. The Titans seem to be slowly improving and are playing at home.

Patriots giving 5.5 to Bills is a hard one to call. Bills aren't bottom dwellers but aren't much better than one. Patriots are playing their usual hard, scrappy, resourceful football, so I'll have to go with them even though they are depleted from their Super Bowl strength on both sides of the ball. Patriots have a chance for a high playoff seed simply because the rest of their division is so weak - they're not going to screw that up on the Bills.

I'll take the Falcons and 2.5 points against the Steelers. The Steelers are not as bad as their record indicates, but are not so good that they should be getting points on the road against a winning team. The Falcons, stunned into humility by utter destruction at the hands of the Giants, will be less overconfident and better prepared to win this one.

Miami gives 5 at home against the Packers, another tough call for me. Both these teams stink. I'm going with Miami simply because they're playing at home, and it's easier for a bad team to fall apart on the road. Miami will show flashes of the good team people expected at the start of the season.

I'll take the Bucs and five points over the Eagles. The Bucs are showing new life and the Eagles are finding ways to lose. Donovan McNabb is playing great but can't alone change Philidelphia's self-destructive streak. Then again, maybe I just hate Philly.

The Panthers will beat the 3 points they give to the Bengals, playing in Cincinnati. The Panthers have been a wrecking ball since Steve Smith's return, and as much as I dislike saying that one player makes that much difference, I think it does to Carolina in this case. Bengals aren't playing their best and won't be competitive in this game.

I take Denver, giving 4.5 to the Browns. Cleveland needs to score some points before I believe they can beat a spread.

I'll take the Colts, giving 9 to the Redskins. That's a lot of points to give, but the Colts have something to prove right now, and the Redskins aren't clicking well.

Vikings are offered 6.5 against the Seahawks, and I'll take the Vikes and the points. Vikings are a decent team that seems to know how to stay in games. Seahawks have been looking weaker and weaker in successive games - it's time for them to break.

Contrary to popular opinion, I do not think that this is Oakland's week to win. Contrary to all known sports tradition I will actually take Arizona - on the road no less - and GIVE points, 3 to be precise. Arizona's first 40 minutes on Monday were something to build on. Oakland has nothing to build on.

and finally, I take the Giants and 3.5 points against the Cowboys. These Giants see themselves as Superbowl winners, and based on their play for most of the last two games, I believe it. When the Giants set their mind to something, the only thing that can stop them is the clock. Sure, Cowboys have the league's #1 run defense. But before last week's games, Atlanta had that honor, and the Giants piled up 259 running yards on the ground. Giants can and will play into the teeth of the Cowboys' strength and win.

Tuesday, October 17, 2006

Time flies

Has it really been almost a year since I last made a post here? I guess it has. Now I have not one but two kittens, but I cannot blame them for my lack of updating this blog. The reason I have not updated this blog is because I put most of my politics-related thoughts down on Free Republic.

Alas, that is no more. I have done something I had not thought possible, which was to become too politically conservative for even Free Republic to accept. You see, I have judged the GOP, and found it wanting.

I had long placed all my hopes and faith in the GOP, that it would be the vehicle through which America would return to its roots - life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Yet an accounting of six years of unified GOP governance shows that not only have those hopes not been fulfilled, but we have lost even more ground in the meantime.

This is not to say I have any fidelity whatsoever to the Democrats; surely they are today as vile a political party as America has ever seen. But between them and the GOP it has not been a study of contrasts; instead, it has been a race to the bottom. As corrupt as the Democrats have traditionally been and still are, the GOP is doing all it can to match their record.

A brief list of the unacceptable:

- Campaign reform
- Mexico policy
- The midgame forfeit in the War on Terror
- Preservation of the filibuster
- Failure to reform Social Security
- Prescription drugs subsidies
- Pork-barrel spending
- Online gambling ban
- Supplication to the UN
- Sandy Berger's slap on the wrist

That list is just "off the cuff", so to speak. Given that it's late here and I'm pretty tired, there are many important things that aren't on the list. For now, though, it's a good summary.

Which brings me back to my (voluntary, in case anyone was wondering) departure from Free Republic tonight. Free Republic is a revolutionary forum, a ground zero for conservative thought on the Internet. The owner, Jim Robinson, is a good man who has every right to be proud of his historic accomplishment. I too was proud of it, even if just for the minor elements which I contributed, like the ability to link and respond to a specific post.

My role on Free Republic was that of an agitator; whenever possible I would try to put out an alternative way of looking at any given situation, even where I myself did not necessarily believe the alternative was sound. The purpose of this was, like my handle, to move thoughts. It has been the strength of the modern conservative that he can entertain a far wider variety of ideas than can the modern dogmatic leftist, and by doing what I do, my aim was to contribute to that strength of reason by challenging any line of thinking that was even remotely dogmatic. In forcing conservative ideas to be thought through to rebut dissent and alternative opinion, the results were more robust, logical, and relevant than they may have been otherwise - and the serial demolition of the Democrats in three straight elections was the result.

In contrast, the Left tolerates no dissent or alternative opinion whatsoever (just try to talk to one about something that does not align with their belief system). Free Republic's acceptance of my controversial, smart-alecky self was proof that the Right indeed has been the true bastion of actual tolerance of ideas and free thinking.

Alas, my latest idea was a step too far for even that remarkable site.

Wednesday, November 23, 2005

The newest addition to the thoughtomator household

I will be bringing this gorgeous lady home in a few weeks... say hello to kitty!
Here's some pics of kitty and her family... she's the one who is awake. Names I've been thinking about are... Sasha, Moria, Taya, Nebula, and Schrodinger.
Here's more kitty goodness: